Why do dual cores still exist?

Why do dual cores still exist?

For when 1-4 threads are enough

Poorfag Pajeets. Anyone that claims otherwise is lying.

for normies

Intel says you don't need more than 2.

because your grandma doesn't need a 32 thread xeon to check her email

Facebook and Microsoft office machines don't need quad cores.

to hold back the market

...

This thinking is wrong. I think at this point all chips have systems to throttle down unneeded resources. If the 2 additional cores aren't needed they won't contribute much to the overall power usage. Even if they do use slightly more on average they offset that by being able to accomplish twice as much per clock cycle and then throttling down faster. Having a bunch of lower clocked cores is better than having a few high clocked cores. Plus software decoding for video codecs can be resource intensive and two cores may nit be sufficient

you do know that dual core CPUs are binned quad cores 99% of the time right?

Intel still produces dual core dies I believe. I don't know if AMD is even bothering with dual cores anymore but that might be true for them.

There's always some shitty silicon so bad you can't sell with more than 2 cores enabled.

a dual core takes less space on a die unless you make the quad core cores smaller

4 weak cores is shit tier in single thread tasks

From a consumer perspective I think quad cores best dual cores all around pretty much. The quad cores often have higher default and turbo speeds. For the die size/yield issues it's mostly a non-issue. On the consumer side the price difference is maybe around $50-100 but the performance difference pretty much completely offsets that. It's foolish to buy a dual core system now. You can get one second hand and still get a deal but if you buy a new dual core over a quad core you're just getting a worse deal all around.

your grandma has no reason to pay extra 50-100 bucks

bump

Smaller power consumption on mobile computing devices (laptops)

>everyone who is poor or money conscious is Indian
What

Anyways an i3 is enough for most gaming (in that it won't bottleneck a $200 GPU, not that it will run everything on max all day 4K)

It's more than enough for browsing and any productivity software. It only lacks in AutoCAD and rendering workloads.

I concur, my i3-6100 worked fantastic, one of the best purchases to date.

because laptops exist

>Intel says you don't need more than 2
Apple doesn' think you need more than 2, either. (see "new" mac mini)